==Synopsis==
Until Opinions about 1970, all contraception have varied in the Orthodox churches opposed the use Church. There is complete unanimity that no form of contraceptionthat is abortifacient is acceptable and there are definitive ecumenical canons that proscribe abortifacients.{{fact}} Since that time a "new consensus" has emergedThe Fathers of the Church, mostly, but not exclusively in Americasuch as Ss. This new view basically holds that contraception is acceptable within a Christian marriage if: :1) Athanasius the means Great, John Chrysostom, Epiphanios, Jerome, Ambrose, Augustine of contraception is not abortifacientHippo, Caesarious, :2) if it is used with Gregory the blessing Great, Augustine of one's spiritual fatherCanterbury and Maximos the Confessor, and :3) if children all explicitely condemned abortion as well as the use of abortifacients. However there are not completely excluded from a range of opinions on the marriageissue of non-abortifacient contraception.
The statement on marriage :1) There are those who hold the view that sex should only be for the purpose of pro-creation, and so even natural family from the 10th All-American Council of the Orthodox Church in America follows along these lines: planning would be prohibited.
* http://www.oca.org/DOCmarriage.asp?ID=192)There are those who argue that natural family planning is acceptable, because it simply involves abstinence from sex during times when fertility is likely.
This "new consensus" has not gone unchallenged. Some :3)There are those who teach the traditional view of the Church, that non-abortifacient contraception is acceptable if it is sinful to artificially separate used with the pleasure blessing of intercourse from Godone's purpose of procreation. Others hold a view somewhat similar to the [[Roman Catholic Church|Roman Catholic]] positionspiritual father, which would allow family planning in principle, i.e., Natural Family Planning, while at the same time opposing contraception—many Orthodox hierarchs and theologians from around the world lauded ''Humanae Vitae'' when if it was issued. A few think the "new consensus" position is too conservative and more freely allow contraceptionnot used simply to avoid having children for purely selfish reasons.
Many people, [http://www.oca.org/DOCmarriage.asp?ID=19 The statement on all sides, believe that this change in thinking on this issue of contraception has not received adequate examination. Too often it has become tied up in identity politics, with various groups accusing marriage and family from the other of western influence. It is true that this discussion is closely related to a number 10th All-American Council of complex issues that have not fully been addressed in Orthodox theology. Roman Catholics are sometimes bewildered by how the Orthodox Church could allow such a change in teachingAmerica] follows along these lines, as does [http://orthodoxeurope. One might respond by saying that org/page/3/14.aspx "The Bases of the dynamics Social Concept of the Russian Orthodox tradition function much differently than Rome'sChurch, and that this issue must be worked through in a manner quite different from a magisterial decree" section XII. 3.]
It must be noted that the Fathers of the ChurchWhile some local churches have issues official statements on this issue, such as Ss. Clement of Alexandria, Athanasius the Great, John Chrysostom, Epiphanios, Jerome, Ambrose, Augustine of Hippo, Caesarious, Gregory the Great, Augustine of Canterbury and Maximos the Confessor, all explicitely condemned contraception,{{fact}} whether abortive or non-abortive. As of yet, there it is yet to be a single Orthodox Saint who did not consider an issue that has been clearly defined by the use of contraception to be a grave sinentire Church.
Vocal opponents to the current secularized view of contraception in Orthodoxy include [incomplete]: